Dabura

NIEDERMAYER RESERVED 100% HEALTHY FULLY RESTED SCHNEIDER $880,000 IMPLICATIONS ANYONE CAN BE "SUSPENDED" CAP LOOPHOLE TRADING SALARIES BRIAN BURKE

Well this'll be interesting.

It's more viability than superiority (though I suppose the former begets the latter). The traditional markets are cherished by the league and hockey fans alike because they're the sport's lifeblood; no matter what happens, they will always be hockey-friendly places. What I think Bettman and the various other powers-that-be fail to realize is that hockey is a bona fide cultural force in most of these markets. Take the pre-game ceremony and post-game ovation for Chelios at the Wings-Habs game: that's honest-to-goodness hockey fanaticism, the kind you can't engineer. Certainly not in a place like Nashville, that's for sure. I'll probably be skewered for this, but parallels can be drawn between the expansion situation and the U.S.'s recent involvement in Iraq. The U.S. was doomed to fail from the start for a number of reasons, but the one that is most relevant to this discussion is this: we didn't fully understand what we were dealing with. Making the war a matter of "Us vs. Them," of "Freedom for the People" simplified the volatile state of Iraq to the point of absurdity; cultural, religious, political -- all manner of complex forces already present in Iraq were ignored. The result is the mess we're in today. Similarly, Bettman and co. seem to be working with a very flimsy grasp of those things which make certain markets viable and other markets inhospitable. Sure, you can establish an NHL franchise in Mexico City, but that doesn't mean the city at large is going to care all that much, let alone sustain it long-term. As the NHL is first and foremost a business, that is not a risk worth taking. Nashville certainly wasn't a risk worth taking, as the league had (and still has) enough things to worry about without also having to dote on franchises withering away in infertile markets, draining resources and diluting talent like gigantic leeches. Cancerous leeches. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for spreading the hockey love. But there are smart ways of doing it and there are stupid ways of doing it. This whole Nashville debacle is what you get when you try a stupid way.

In the immortal words of Matt Foley, LA-DEE-FREAKIN'-DA The Wings franchise is in the business of doing whatever it takes to win it all every season. To that end, weaknesses in the lineup should be addressed, not glossed over because of that totally sweet fake D-Mac pulled in game 4 way back in '97. You like the current lineup so much? Well, consider this: the only reason it looks the way it does and had such an impressive run last season is because management made substantial changes in response to perceived problems (e.g. Lewis was a bad fit, the team was too soft and old). Management saw a problem. Management addressed much of the problem. It paid off. That's called being proactive. Being proactive wins you the Cup. What doesn't win you the Cup is being complacent and ignoring weaknesses, especially when those same weaknesses had a collective hand in at least one recent playoff exit. Fact: The Wings have only two goal-scorers/consistent offensive threats, neither of which are even pure goal-scorers to begin with. Fact: The Wings' blue line is in desperate need of a stabilizing, big-bodied stay-at-home presence in the top-4. The D has been making brain farts all season long, and it's because there are too many guys playing the same brand of defense (offensively-minded) and not enough guys there to cover their asses. '97 means nothing. '08 means everything.

pwnd

Wonder of wonders!

I like Miller, but that interview was hard to watch. He talked to Scotty like he was a senile, partially deaf old man.

You all know who Brian Burke is, right?

He had this mapped out all along.

The Wings' lineup always looks fine -- in the regular season. But, as the last 7,000 disappointing playoff exits have illustrated, the regular season means jack. The Wings need more scoring depth and a big, steady, top-4 stay-at-home defenseman. And some size on offense wouldn't hurt. As it stands, they're counting on two players to win games for them. I don't care how well Hank and Dats are playing -- you need more depth than that if you want to win the Cup.

Homer is special because he's the best at what he does -- and, to some extent, the only one who does what he does. True, it's taken him a long time to be so successful, but he's always had the same basic role, so it's not like he's been a full-fledged revelation. Hudler, on the other hand, is not nearly as unique and irreplaceable; he's a smallish forward with good hands and nifty skills. It wouldn't be too difficult to adequately replace him. As for Sundin, obviously the # of years he's looking for is going to be important. However, even if he would only come for this one postseason run, I would still deal Hudler, Sammy, Kindl and a pick. The Wings organization is in the business of doing everything it can to win a Cup every season. The Wings' chances of going all the way this season would increase exponentially were Sundin to come on board, even if it meant losing Hudler and Sammy (neither of which will ever be as valuable as a 36-year-old Sundin). Plus, there's nothing to say he wouldn't come back for another season in Motown; he's still got a good three or four seasons left in him, leaving him plenty of time for him to try other things and then return to Toronto. Having said all of this, I'll be amazed if he leaves the Leafs this season. In fact, I'll be amazed if Holland pulls off anything remotely resembling a blockbuster deal this season. I imagine he's perfectly content to hold off on anything big until he has Hank re-signed, which would mean no dice for next summer's FA pool as well. Good times.

Flip I can understand. Watching him against Montreal just reaffirmed my belief that he's going to be a elite player in 3-4 years. The guy is ridiculous. Hudler...meh. He's doing well, but his upside is limited. I wouldn't think twice about dealing him if it meant getting Sundin, who, even at 36, is an absolute monster -- and on the godawful Leafs, no less. Gigantic frame (something we're completely lacking), natural goal-scoring talent (something we're almost completely lacking), consistent production (it would be nice depending on three players to win us games, as opposed to just two in Hank and Dats), first-rate leadership qualities, responsible defensively, clutch, Swedish -- the list goes on. Hudler, Sammy, Kindl and a pick. Zetterberg - Datsyuk - Holmstrom Cleary - Sundin - Filppula = Cup

Just have to hope our offense clicks.

I laughed. Oh how I laughed.

I know. He's old and he needed the rest. You're being obstinate. Saved money (possibly). Reserved player. Completely healthy player. Etc. The message this sends, or at least implies, is that a player can basically do anything he wants in the way of playing or not playing as long as he doesn't join another team. Seeing as how our second line isn't quite cutting it right now, I suggest "suspending" all of them and bringing in three new guys with the money we would have given the suspended guys. Then, should one of the new guys falter, we'll just axe him and bring back an old guy. Better yet, we can just suspend the new guy and start bringing in a third wave of new guys!

OK, I take back everything I said. Dandy was perfectly justified. You people.

The 'hawks reference was just a joke, seeing as how they're the only team that has the Wings' number.

Actually, yeah, it was like a sucker punch. In fact, it was a textbook example of a sucker punch; Sammy had no idea it was coming, and he was taken down in such a way that his career could have easily ended right then and there. Moot point. If Draper had gotten up after Lemieux rearranged his face, would you have said, "No harm, no foul"? No, I don't think you would have. Lou, you need to stop running your mouth. I get it: you like the rough stuff. So do I. You like it when players defend their captains. So do I. But a player is a human first and a hockey player second, and roughing can only be taken so far on the ice before it becomes borderline criminal. There are many acceptable ways in which a player can send a message. Taking someone down from behind like that is not one of them. If you believe otherwise, you're a disgrace to the sport.

Niedermayer, though under contract, is bypassing playing, while the Ducks are bypassing paying him. Which is all well and good on the surface -- but sinister underneath. Scott's a top defenseman, but he's old and he needed to rest after the Cup run. What would any shrewd GM want to do in that situation? Obvious: keep him contractually tied to your team, but get yourself off the hook for his pay by dealing him a mean ol' "suspension." Then, when he's fully rested and restored, lift that "suspension," put him right back there in the lineup, and watch him tear s*** up like he never left. But that's more than a little disingenuous, and I'm glad no GM has tried pulling it off. Oh, wait, never mind.

I feel really uneasy about our situation...in terms of deal-making. There are so many things Holland could use to rationalize sticking with what we have, or just adding a journey man or two. - The team is doing well. - The Ducks aren't doing well. - The 'hawks won't make the playoffs. - Hank is playing like a madman. - Hank's contract expiration looms large on the horizon. - Everyone is getting overpaid these days. - We have very, very few legitimate assets. - Next summer's FA pool is pretty good. - The moon's gravitational pull something something something realities of the salary cap era something something laser beams something something something something what we already have. I really do hope Sundin has an interest in Motown.

And people wonder why hockey has such a bad reputation. There's a line. Dandy crossed it. Anyone who supports the way Dandy took out Sammy is a meat head.

Then you should be reproaching Dandenault, not applauding him. His action flies in the face of everything the old school players stood for in terms of an unwritten code, or a value system, or whatever you want to call it. It was totally gutless, it showed a complete lack of respect, and it was extremely dangerous. I don't care if his captain was pushing and shoving with someone -- you don't do that, period.

What Dandenault did -- or, perhaps more specifically, the way he did it -- is gutless and never acceptable. I'll probably get a lot of s*** for this saying this, but: it wasn't too far removed from the Bert-Moore takedown. It doesn't matter if some guy's hassling your smallish captain -- you don't take the guy down from behind like that, especially if he's standing still, you're going full-steam, and the guy has absolutely no idea you're about to push him down face-first onto the ice. Like Hank said after the game, "It would have been OK if Samuelsson saw him, that would have been fine, but coming from behind there, injuries can develop from that." But this is what happens when Colly and Gary don't take a hard stance on the kind of s*** Philly's been pulling this season.

People will be looking to put him through the glass. I'd like to see that, personally.

No way. Game had its moments, though. Good win overall.